[diego]

Is there any game series that you haven't played in a typical order of 1, 2, 3... ? How that happened? Which series do you think can be played in an untypical or reversed order and still be enjoyed, and which ones can't?


What motivated me to ask this is that now i'm preparing myself to play The Black Mirror. I've played only The Black Mirror 2, so now i'd have to play preferably The Black Mirror 1, and then TBM 3.

I'll start with some of my experiences - even though i did play Monkey Island 1 and 2 before, i think it was with Curse what motivated me to go back and finish them, and the Curse is often the one i recommend to the beginners, simply because of a more user-friendly interface, which will hopefully motivate them to play earlier games. As for Gabriel Knight, it was The Beast Within i started with.

Of course - some of these experiences span over many years, and it's different when someone simply wishes to play a particular game series at once.

[Oscar]

I played Riven before Myst. That probably explains why I didn't find Myst too hard, while most did.

Hm let's see...
Gabriel Knight I played in the order 1,3,2. I liked 2 the least out of all of them.

I don't know if Sherlock Holmes is a 'series', but I played those all out of order. Carol Reed too.

Also the Dark Fall series - I went 2,3,1 and enjoyed all of them.

Rhem I went 1 to 4, haven't played the others.

[Sefir]

I also played the Black Mirror in a 2,3,1 order.
Other series I played backwards is Discworld in a 2,1, Noir faschion (since some technical problems with the first), Larry (I have yet to play the 3rd & 6th ones), Darkfall (I never played the 2nd) and Monkey Island (4,3,1,2,Tales).
I loved them all.

[Pieter Jan]

Though I played the sequel first, I would sincerely recommend playing the Little Big Adventure games in the right order. Seeing artifacts of the first one turn up in the second one in the form of a museum and tourist atraction is just such a rewarding experience!

[TimovieMan]

I don't think I've ever played a series in the wrong order. Definitely not when that mattered.

I mean, I've played Discworld Noir and still have Discworld 2 to play, but the order of that doesn't matter.
I've played Day of the Tentacle several times before I played Maniac Mansion. Doesn't matter either.

And I've played every game in the Larry Collection, but left most of them unfinished (because of dead ends or simply being stuck - this was mostly pre-internet). It didn't matter either.

The only King's Quest I've played is VII, but now I'm going to play V, VI and then replay (and actually finish) VII. The order won't matter either.

Basically, if the order matters, then the developers did something wrong.
All necessary exposition should be included in the intro, and the only thing one should miss is the occasional reference, but that should have no impact whatsoever in the gameplay or in how good a game is...

[skeeter_93]

I've played a few out of order - started with GK 3, skipped from KQ 5 to 7, played DOTT but not Manic Mansion. But I do try to play in order if I can...

[Arial Type]

I played Monkey Island 2-4-3-1 and Gabriel Knight 3-1-2, in that order. Somehow I never had a problem with that.

[diego]

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

Basically, if the order matters, then the developers did something wrong.

I agree, but also sometimes completely different team worked on a sequel, and they had to cope with or explain some aspects of the original - like Monkey Island 3. It's not like that you can't watch The Empire Strikes Back, learn about the heavy spoiler and still enjoy A New Hope, but take Black Mirror for example - like Fien said, i've also felt Black Mirror 2 "spoiled" too much of the original, and that's why i hesitated to play BM1 (but gotta say, i'm enjoying it so far - an eerie atmosphere and reminds me of Phantasmagoria).

But of course, it's irrelevant in game series like Sherlock Holmes or Carol Reed, as each game is a separate case.

[SweetDalilah]

I played Runaway 2 first, and then Runaway I and in the end Runaway 3

While playing Runaway 2 I didn't know who some characters were, that appeared in the Runaway: A Road Adventure (like Joshua, Sushi etc) and it wasn't really explained in the game. After that I played the first game, and all the pieces were put together.

But since Runaway 2 finished with a cliffhanger, and I played the first game while waiting for Runaway 3 to come out, so by that time I have mostly forgotten the ending of Runaway 2, and couldn't remember what happened while playing Runaway 3

So I do recommend you to play the games that have sequels in order (unless they have totally separate and unconnected stories (e.g. Discworld Noir)), unless you want to get everything mixed up

[Adventurere No.1]

King's Quest took that order with me
4 -2 -1- 5 -7 -6 - 8 - 3
very messy i know but i remember i just played what i got my hands on at that time

[marcd2011]

i played the first black mirror after the second and though it worked well that way around. I tried playing the first game years ago but found it boring, but playing it as a prequel to the second game i found it much more interesting as it filled in holes in the backstory

[JanaBanana]

I played Sherlock Holmes, I don't even know in which order and I enjoyed Also I played Dreamfall first and then The longest journey (if that can be counted as a series) and dont see the reason why not.
As for the black mirror I played only part 3...Did I do somethin bad?

[zobraks]

I believe Gabriel Knight games can be played with equal pleasure regardless of order you take, although they're so different graphicswise. Such a small series and such a big graphics diversity (from fist-sized pixels through FMV to screaming state-of-the-art 3D).

I played Gabriel Knight 3: Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Damned first, then Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers (never finished it, though) and The Beast Within: A Gabriel Knight Mystery in the end. 3-1-2.
I immensely enjoyed all of them.

Originally Posted by diego

How that happened?

Well, I played them in the same order as I happened to lay my hands on them. Simple as that.
No well devised plan behind the order of playing.

I've played Monkey Island series 3-4-1-2-1-2 and Discworld series 3-1-2-3 .
For pretty much the same reason(s) as for GK series.

I reckon I started playing AGs way too late and it shows (not in quizzes though ).

[SamuelGordon]

Runaway 2 , 1 , 3

Secret Files 2 , Secret Files Tunguska (the voice change was weird)

I think that's about it. I make it a rule now to play the games in order, not that there's anything wrong with that. It's probably some kinda OCD thing with me

[zane]

For me, pretty much any of the "quest" games.. police quest, space quest, quest for glory, kings quest.. apparently if it has quest in the title i wont play it in order.
Otherwise i play pretty much everything else in order.

[DustyShinigami]

There aren't many I've played out of order... I usually play them IN order.

There's Discworld though: 3-1-2
And Monkey Island: 3-4-1-2

That's all I can think of...

[millenia]

Larry 1,3,6 and the rest after, don't remember the order
Broken Sword 2,1,4 (I started the third sometime after 2nd or 1st game but it kept crashing quite early and then I forgot about it, will play it some time after I've played the 1 and 2 remastered.

Larrys don't really matter that much but it was weird playing Broken Sword 1 after the 2nd game. This "happened" because I found BS2 in some bargain bin and I had never even heard of the series. Later I found out that the first game is supposed to be even better so I played it too.

Nowadays I really want to play and watch thing in the correct order (I actually use guides when watching Buffy+Angel marathon or B5+movies etc.) and definitely would get my hands on the first game of the series if it's supposed to be worth playing. So in order or skipping altogether.

[seebaruk]

Originally Posted by Arial Type

I played Monkey Island 2-4-3-1 and Gabriel Knight 3-1-2, in that order. Somehow I never had a problem with that.

Ahh, I did the Gabriel Knights out of order too - 2 then 1 then 3. To be honest, if I'd started with 3 I doubt I'd have bothered with 1 & 2, so kudos. 2 is still my favourite, but I'm a sucker for FMV...

[MoonBird]

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

Basically, if the order matters, then the developers did something wrong.

On the other hand, I agree, but on the other... I don't. After all, I think it's a matter of style. Story can be contiunous in the series, and it adds a nice touch and cool references to predecessors. I'm the kind of person, to whom it is very important to feel welcome and 'at home' in the adventure. It's nice to have something to build on to - develop and continue the same story. Surprisingly enough, I still don't like episodic structure. Maybe it has something to do with the length of episodes. I think it disturbs too much the flow of the story as a whole.

As a conclusion - I would say that both of those have their fans.

[millenia]

Originally Posted by MoonBird

On the other hand, I agree, but on the other... I don't. After all, I think it's a matter of style. Story can be contiunous in the series, and it adds a nice touch and cool references to predecessors. I'm the kind of person, to whom it is very important to feel welcome and 'at home' in the adventure. It's nice to have something to build on to - develop and continue the same story. Surprisingly enough, I still don't like episodic structure. Maybe it has something to do with the length of episodes. I think it disturbs too much the flow of the story as a whole.

As a conclusion - I would say that both of those have their fans.

I agree with this. It's a matter of taste to me, how I like my stories. Not that the games would not be enjoyable or playable in a "wrong" order. Same thing with TV-series and movies as I said. I just get so much more out of it and get sucked into the story so much better when I go through it properly instead of bits here and bits there.